ORDER : [1] By way of present successive bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed for regular bail. [2] The present application is filed by the applicant for regular bail in connection with an FIR bearing No. I - C.R. No. 113 of 2019 dated 28.12.2019 registered with Chhota Udaipur Police Station, District: Chhota Udaipur for the offence under Sections 363, 366, 376(2) (H)(M) and under Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. [3] Heard Mr. Kartikkumar Barot, learned advocate for the applicant and Ms. Moxa Thakkar, learned APP for the respondent State. [4] Mr. Kartikkumar Barot, learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that earlier application being Criminal Misc. Application No. 13693 of 2020 came to be withdrawn on 24.12.2020 with a liberty to file application afresh before trial Court after recording of evidence of the victim or after four months from today, whichever is earlier. He has submitted that more than one year has passed and yet the evidence of the prosecutrix is not completed by the prosecution. He has submitted after partial recording of the evidence, the prosecutrix is not attending the Court and, therefore the trial Court has issued warrant against her and the police is unable to procure the presence of the victim and that, the evidence of the prosecutrix is not completed till today. He has further submitted that the victim in her statement before the Magistrate under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has not supported version of the prosecutrix regarding the alleged act of intercourse and, therefore, considering this aspect and the fact that the accused is in jail since 24.1.2020, the application may be allowed. [5] Per contra, Ms. Moxa Thakkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has vehemently opposed in granting of regular bail and has contended that partial evidence of the victim is already been recorded and thereafter since the victim is not coming before the Court, warrant has already been issued. In Chief- Examination she has supported the case of the prosecutrix and the statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is not be considered at this stage. She has submitted that considering the age of the victim, application may be dismissed. [6] I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties. In Chief- Examination she has supported the case of the prosecutrix and the statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is not be considered at this stage. She has submitted that considering the age of the victim, application may be dismissed. [6] I have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties. This Court has considered following aspects:- (i) The accused is in jail since 24.1.2020; (ii) Partial evidence of the prosecutrix has been examined on 11.10.2021, the victim is not remaining present though warrant has been issued; (iii) The version of the prosecutrix before the Magistrate under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.; (iv) There is no lieklihood ofcompletion of trial in short period. (v) This Court has also considered the law laid down by Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 . (vi) This Court has also taken into consideration the assurance given on behalf of the applicant that he will abide by all conditions that may be imposed by this Court. [7] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. [7] In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations made against the applicant in the FIR, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Hence, the present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with an FIR bearing No. I - C.R. No. 113 of 2019 dated 28.12.2019 registered with Chhota Udaipur Police Station, District: Chhota Udaipur on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that the applicant shall; [a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; [b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution; [c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week; [d] not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned; [e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station on every Monday of each English calendar month for a period of three months and thereafter, alternate Monday for a period of six months, between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.; [f] furnish latest and permanent address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court; [8] The Authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the learned Lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. At the trial, learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail. [9] Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Registry is directed to serve this order to the concerned authority through e-mail/fax or any other electronic mode.